Committee of Ministers

Home , Sali Berisha

/ r ) SECRETARIAT GENERAL y* f * i * * y SECRETARIAT OF THE COMMITTEE OF MINISTERS VI 'S' SECRETARIAT DU COMITE DES MINISTRES COUNCIL CONSEIL OF EUROPE DE L'EUROPE Committee of Ministers Comité des Ministres Contact: Abel Campos Tel: 03 88 41 26 48

Date: 24/04/2013 DH-DD(2013)444

Documents distributed at the request of a Representative shall be under the sole responsibility of the said Representative, without prejudice to the legal or political position of the Committee of Ministers.

Meeting: 1172 DH meeting(4-6 June2013)

Item reference: Communication from the applicant(26/11/2012) in the case of Gjonbocari and others against Albania (Application No. 10508/02)

Information made available under Rule 9.1 of the Rules of the Committee of Ministers for the supervision of the execution of judgments and of the terms of friendly settlements.

***********

Les documents distribués à la demande d’un/e Représentant/e le sont sous la seule responsabilité dudit/de ladite Représentant/e, sans préjuger de la position juridique ou politique du Comité des Ministres.

Réunion : 1172 réunion DH(4-6 juin 2013)

Référence du point : Communication du requérant(26/11/2012) dans l’affaire Gjonbocari et autres contre Albanie (Requête10508/02) n° (anglais uniquement)

Informations mises à disposition en vertu de la Règle 9.1 des Règles du Comité des Ministres pour la surveillance de l’exécution des arrêts et des termes des règlements amiables. DH-DD(2013)444: Rule 9.1 : communication from the applicant in Gjonbocari against Albania. Documents distributed at the request of a Representative shall be under the sole responsibility of the said Representative, without prejudice to the legal or political position of the Committee of Ministers. / Les documents distribués à la dem ande d’un/e Représentant/e le sont sous la seule responsabilité dudit/de ladite Représentant/e, sans préjuger de la position juridique ou politique du Comité des Ministres.

DGI 2 6 NOV. 2012

SERVICE DE L EXECUTION Ü E S ARRI- T S DE LA C E D H

Gezim Boçari Str. Sulejman Delvina nd 9, h.7.ap. 10 Kodi postar 1019 Tirana. ALBANIA

To: Mr. Abel DE CAMPOS Human Rights Treaties and Meetings Secretariat of the Committee of Ministers Council of Europe Avenue de l’Europe F - 67075 Strasbourg Cedex FRANCE

20. 11.2012

Reference: CASE OF GJONBOCARI AND OTHERS v. ALBANIA, no. 10508/02, judgement of 23/10/2007 + report Albania, November 5, 2012

D ear Sir,

I’m writing with regard the non-enforcement by the Albanian State of the decision of the Strasbourg Court Case of Gonbocari and Others v. ALBANIA, no. 10508/02, judgement of 23/10/2007, which is under discussion the Committee of Ministers of Council of Europe.

On behalf of Boçari family, I have addressed for the second time to the Strasbourg Court regarding the failure of Albanian authorities to execute the decision of the Court (Application Bocari no.75984/11 v. Albania)

Apart from the Application no.75984/11 Bocari v. Albania, I have sent 7 claims addressed to: Department For The Execution Of The Judgements Of The European Court Of Human Rights, Council of Europe, F-67075 Strasbourg-Cedex, for non-execution of Case no. 10508/02, judgment of 23/10/2007, but I have received no answer to this date and I do not know if these letters have reached the right place. Please find enclosed copies of these 7 letters sent by registered mail (dated September 4, 2008, March 9, 2009, January 27, 2010, April 2, 2010, October 18, 2010, March 16, 2011, July 15,2011.)

Through this internet link: (coe.int/com.instranet.InstraServlet?command=com.instranet.CmdBlobGet&lnstranetImage=2l 7 6261 &SecMode= 1 &Docld= 1948700&Usage=2) I found the report of the General Secretariat of the Committee of Ministers, the office of the service execution, dated 5 November 2012, DH-DD(2012)1031, distributed at the request of Albania, Communication from Albania concerning the case of Gjonbocari against Albania (Application No. 10508/02). DH-DD(2013)444: Rule 9.1 : communication from the applicant in Gjonbocari against Albania. Documents distributed at the request of a Representative shall be under the sole responsibility of the said Representative, without prejudice to the legal or political position of the Committee of Ministers. / Les documents distribués à la dem ande d’un/e Représentant/e le sont sous la seule responsabilité dudit/de ladite Représentant/e, sans préjuger de la position juridique ou politique du Comité des Ministres.

We consider the information provided in the report incorrect and not true for the following reasons: 1. The explanations given in this report by the Albanian State are not in relation with the execution of the decision of the Supreme Court No. 502 dated 6.03.2003, because they have no connection with the subject of the decision. 2. In their conclusion the Government representatives cited the decision of the commission of Vlora No 45/2009 as if this has given us back all our property (950 +150 vreten, 1 vreten = 1296 m. Sq. meters). This is untrue. The decision 45/2009, which was received by the Commission of Vlora is on hold because is not signed by Tirana Property Agency that has now taken the role of previous local Commissions. Consequently we remain stripped of the right to enjoy as other Albanian citizens and in accordance to the law at least even part of our inherited property. Furthermore this decision does not relate at all to the decision of the Supreme Court No. 502. 3. All further court decisions cited in the report of the representative of the Albanian State are not related neither to the object nor the execution of the decision of the Supreme Court No. 502. Non execution of the decision of the High Court no 502 that is the restitution of 2 hectares, that about 1.5% of the entire expropriated property, but has recognised the entire land as our property, aims to camouflage a mega corruption with a large surface to land of high-value tourism. Vlora’s decisions No. 58 and 59 dated 31.08.2007 and respective decisions No. 414 and 415 dated 22.04.2008 of the Central Agency aimed at unlawful transferring of all our inherited property to third parties. 4. If the execution of a decision of the courts of the country and more so the decisions of the Court of Strasbourg are conditioned by any kind of court or administrative decision taken later then this practically denies legal guarantees.

In the second paragraph the representative of the government states that the administrative stage of the execution of the decision of the Supreme Court nr.502 has started with decisions nr 58 and 59 date 31.08.2007, practically 2 months before the issuance of punishment of the Albanian state by the tiHCR.

1. This is not true because, 2 years later, the Minister of Justice in one of the response letters (ref. Prot.G61/5 date 16.12.2009) states that decision nr.502 date 06.03.2003 of the Supreme Court is under execution. 2. Also, on dates 12.9.2008 and 02.09.2009 the Bailiff Office in Vlora have applied a penalty to the official of the Office of the Property Restitution for the non-execution of the Supreme Court’s decision.

3. The claim that the execution of the decision has started with the decisions 58 and 59 date 31.08.2007 is also a false statement because from letters (nr.prot 3559/1 dt 03.12.2007) that the General Director of the Agency for Property Restitution has sent to the Bailiff office of Vlora can be read as: “....we clarify that Decision nr.502 date 06.03.2003 is not possible to executebecause the case is being reviewed from the Regional Office of the Restitution and Compensation of Property, Region of Vlora and the Court of Strassbourg. DH-DD(2013)444: Rule 9.1 : communication from the applicant in Gjonbocari against Albania. Documents distributed at the request of a Representative shall be under the sole responsibility of the said Representative, without prejudice to the legal or political position of the Committee of Ministers. / Les documents distribués à la dem ande d’un/e Représentant/e le sont sous la seule responsabilité dudit/de ladite Représentant/e, sans préjuger de la position juridique ou politique du Comité des Ministres.

4. The statements of the Albanian Government are not true can be also proved by the document No. PmL 8079/1 date 22.10.2009 of the Minister of Justice sent to the Central Agency for Property Restitution, that in the third paragraph reads “in the same way the General State Attorney has emphasized that in regard to this case the Albanian state has recently reported in April 2009 that the case is under consideration, making thus clear that it is not possible to report the same thing again, because then Albania risks to be penalized by being severely criticized from the Committee of the Council of Ministers and risks the non-application of the principles determined in the Stabilisation and Association Agreement....”

5. The ombudsman has sent several requests to the Agency for Property Restitution and to the Minister of Justice. There is no result or feedback for those letters. These requests relate to the enforcement of the Code of the Administrative Procedure. The Ombudsman has reflected this case in its the annual report of 2011 and has reported to the Council of Europe.

As we are trying through endless processes to get the title back on the family inherited property third parties use our property and there is no single law that would justify the use of our property by them. The execution of the decision nr 502 date 06.03.2003 of the Higher Court requires a few hours of work for verification of documents and relates to completing the mistakes of the document of decision of the Vlora commission No. 109/1996, that is taken based on the law at that time and according to the article 120 of the Code of Administrative Procedure filling gaps without changing the substance of the decision. This is suggested, even by the Ombudsman in several repeated requests.

In addition, we would like to share with you the fact that the above problem was also subject two footages that you may find in the attached CD or by clicking under documents, videos No. I and no- % at www.defendingproperty.com. These two footages are done one from a team of French reporters headed by Monfajon and the other on 25 October 2012 from the reporter of the Top Channel (Albanian TV) broadcasted in primetime in the program “Fiks Fare”. In the last one the representative of Agency admits the fact that the decision of the Supreme Court is not yet executed.

We look forward to have a positive response on our subject matter.

Thank you for your cooperation and understanding

Sicerely Gezim Boçari

Enclosed: CDs of the broadcasted footages and 10 letters. DH-DD(2013)444: Rule 9.1 : communication from the applicant in Gjonbocari against Albania. Documents distributed at the request of a Representative shall be under the sole responsibility of the said Representative, without prejudice to the legal or political position of the Committee of Ministers. / Les documents distribués à la dem ande d’un/e Représentant/e le sont sous la seule responsabilité dudit/de ladite Représentant/e, sans préjuger de la position juridique ou politique du Comité des Ministres.

Gezim Boçari Str. Sulejman Delvina nd 9, h.7.ap,10 Kodi postar 1019 Tirana. ALBANIA

To: Mr. Abel DE CAMPOS Human Rights Treaties and Meetings Secretariat of the Committee of Ministers Council of Europe A venue de l’Europe F - 67075 Strasbourg Cedex FRANCE D G I

20. 11.2012 2 6 NOV. 2012

Reference: CASE OF GJONBOCARI AND OTHERS v. ALBANIA, no. 10508/02, judgement of 23/10/2007 + report Albania, November 5, 2012

D ear Sir.

Apart from the Application no.75984/11 Bocari v. Albania, I have sent 7 claims addressed to: Department For The Execution Of The Judgements Of The European Court Of Human Rights, Council of Europe, F-67075 Strasbourg-Cedex, for non-execution of Case no. 10508/02. judgment of 23/10/2007. but 1 have received no answer to this date and I do not know if these letters have reached the right place. Please find enclosed copies of these 7 letters sent by registered mail (dated September 4. 2008. March 9, 2009. January 27. 2010, April 2, 2010. October 18, 2010. March 16, 2011, July 15, 2011.)

Through this internet link: (coe.int/com.instranet.InstraServlet?command=com.instranet.CmdBlobGet&InstranetImage=217 6261 &SecMode=l &DocId=l 948700&Usage=2) I found the report of the General Secretariat of the Committee of Ministers, the office of the service execution, dated 5 November 2012, DFI-DD(2012)1031. distributed at the request of Albania. Communication from Albania concerning the case of Gjonbocari against Albania (Application No. 10508/02). DH-DD(2013)444: Rule 9.1 : communication from the applicant in Gjonbocari against Albania. Documents distributed at the request of a Representative shall be under the sole responsibility of the said Representative, without prejudice to the legal or political position of the Committee of Ministers. / Les documents distribués à la dem ande d’un/e Représentant/e le sont sous la seule responsabilité dudit/de ladite Représentant/e, sans préjuger de la position juridique ou politique du Comité des Ministres.

We consider the information provided in the report incorrect and not true for the following reasons: 1. The explanations given in this report by the Albanian State are not in relation with the execution of the decision of the Supreme Court No. 502 dated 6.03.2003, because they have no connection with the subject of the decision. 2. In their conclusion the Government representatives cited the decision of the commission of Vlora No 45/2009 as if this has given us back all our property (950 +150 vreten, 1 vreten = 1296 m. Sq. meters). This is untrue. The decision 45/2009, which was received by the Commission of Vlora is on hold because is not signed by Tirana Property Agency that has now taken the role of previous local Commissions. Consequently we remain stripped of the right to enjoy as other Albanian citizens and in accordance to the law at least even part of our inherited property. Furthermore this decision does not relate at all to the decision of the Supreme Court N o. 502. 3. All further court decisions cited in the report of the representative of the Albanian State are not related neither to the object nor the execution of the decision of the Supreme Court No. 502. Non execution of the decision of the High Court no 502 that is the restitution of 2 hectares, that about 1.5% of the entire expropriated property, but has recognised the entire land as our property, aims to camouflage a mega corruption with a large surface to land of high-value tourism. Vlora’s decisions No. 58 and 59 dated 31.08.2007 and respective decisions No. 414 and 415 dated 22.04.2008 of the Central Agency aimed at unlawful transferring of all our inherited property to third parties. 4. If the execution of a decision of the courts of the country and more so the decisions of the Court of Strasbourg are conditioned by any kind of court or administrative decision taken later then this practically denies legal guarantees.

1. This is not true because. 2 years later, the Minister of Justice in one of the response letters (ref. Prot.G61/5 date 16.12.2009) states that decision nr.502 date 06.03.2003 of the Supreme Court is under execution. 2. Also, on dates 12.9.2008 and 02.09.2009 the Bailiff Office in Vlora have applied a penalty to the official of the Office of the Property Restitution for the non-execution of the Supreme Court’s decision.

4. The statements of the Albanian Government are not true can be also proved by the document No. Prot. 8079/1 date 22.10.2009 of the Minister of Justice sent to the Central Agency for Property Restitution, that in the third paragraph reads “in the same way the General State Attorney has emphasized that in regard to this case the Albanian state has recently reported in April 2009 that the case is under consideration, making thus clear that it is not possible to report the same thing again, because then Albania risks to be penalized by being severely criticized from the Committee of the Council of Ministers and risks the non-application of the principles determined in the Stabilisation and Association Agreement....”

As we are trying through endless processes to get the title back on the family inherited property, third parties use our property and there is no single law that would justify the use of our property by them. The execution of the decision nr 502 date 06.03.2003 of the Higher Court requires a few hours of work for verification of documents and relates to completing the mistakes of the document of decision of the Vlora commission No. 109/1996, that is taken based on the law at that time and according to the article 120 of the Code of Administrative Procedure filling gaps without changing the substance of the decision. This is suggested, even by the Ombudsman in several repeated requests.

In addition, we would like to share with you the fact that the above problem was also subject two footages that you may find in the attached CD or by clicking under documents, videos No. 1 and no. 22. at www.defcndinuproDenv.com. These two footages are done one from a team of French reporters headed by Monfajon and the other on 25 October 2012 from the reporter of the Top Channel (Albanian TV) broadcasted in primetime in the program “Fiks Fare”. In the last one the representative of Agency admits the fact that the decision of the Supreme Court is not yet executed.

We look forward to have a positive response on our subject matter.

Thank you for your cooperation and understanding

Sicerely Gezim Boçari

Av. Sokol LUÇI Rr. Lidhja e Prizrenit 13/1/15 TIRANA-ALBANIA

Sepember 4, 2008

To the Department for the Execution of Judgments Directorate General II Human Rights of the Council of Europe Fax 033 388 41 2793

Application no. 10508/02 Gjonbocari and others v. Albania

D ear Sir.

As far as the Application no. 10508/02 case of Gjonbocari and Others v. ALBANIA is concerned. 1 would like to inform you as follows:

The Albanian government decision for executing the 49.000 Euro fine is successfully completed .Yet the high court decision No.502 date March 6,2003, that consists in the physical return of the land has not been executed .

As the dead line for the execution of this government decision is expired, you are kindly requested to follow up the respected measures for the enforcement of the government decision

Best regards

Av. Sokol LUÇI Legal representative DH-DD(2013)444: Rule 9.1 : communication from the applicant in Gjonbocari against Albania. Documents distributed at the request of a Representative shall be under the sole responsibility of the said Representative, without prejudice to the legal or political position of the Committee of Ministers. / Les documents distribués à la dem ande d’un/e Représentant/e le sont sous la seule responsabilité dudit/de ladite Représentant/e, sans préjuger de la position juridique ou politique du Comité des Ministres.

Gezim Boçari Rr. Muhamet Gjollesha, Pallati 5/2, shkalla 1, ap 10 Tirana, Albania Tel 355 4 222 1576 Email: [email protected]

March 9, 2009

Department for the Execution of Judgments Directorate General II Human Rights of the Council of Europe F-67075STRASBOURG CEDEX Fax 033 388 41 2793

Judgement no. 10508/02 Gjonbocari and others v. Albania

Dear Sir,

With regard to the Judgment in Gjonbocari and Others v. Albania, (no. 10508/02, 23 October 2007), and in the line of our previous correspondence of September 4, 2008,1 would like to inform you as follows:

The Albanian Government issued the Decision for allocation of funds for payment of the fine of Euro 49,000 pursuant to the Strasbourg Judgment. This part of the decision is entirely executed. Unfortunately the rest o f the judgment is not executed yet. The Government has not taken any action which could ensure the execution of Albanian Supreme Court Decision No. 502, date 6-th o f March 2003. DH-DD(2013)444: Rule 9.1 : communication from the applicant in Gjonbocari against Albania. Documents distributed at the request of a Representative shall be under the sole responsibility of the said Representative, without prejudice to the legal or political position of the Committee of Ministers. / Les documents distribués à la dem ande d’un/e Représentant/e le sont sous la seule responsabilité dudit/de ladite Représentant/e, sans préjuger de la position juridique ou politique du Comité des Ministres.

The Government authorities have failed to execute the Judgment no. 10508/02, 23 October 2007 within the required timeframe.

Meanwhile we have addressed the issue to the Albanian Government Authorities many times and the complaints have been sent to the following authorities: 1 • PrimeMinister’s Office on dates : 27.04.2007. 24.02.2008. 13.03.2008. 21.07.2008. 6.08.2008 ; 11.01.2009 and 9.02.2009.

2. Minister of Justice on dates: 17.05.2008. 9.06.2008. 22.06.2008. 21.07.2008. 30.12.2008 and 9.02.2009

3. Bailiffs Office in Vlora on dates : 25.02.2008 , 5.08.2008 , 12.12.2008. and 29.12.2008.

4. Central Agency for Property Restitution on dates 3.07.2008. 15.08.2008 and 29.12.2008

Further more, other persons are still occupying our property and building up illegally, without having any title and in front of the Albanian Construction Police officers. They are claiming the title over their construction works and the land underneath, being protected by the Law “On the Legalization of the Informal Constructions”, Law No. 9482, date 3.4.2006.

Best regards

Gezim BOÇARI DH-DD(2013)444: Rule 9.1 : communication from the applicant in Gjonbocari against Albania. Documents distributed at the request of a Representative shall be under the sole responsibility of the said Representative, without prejudice to the legal or political position of the Committee of Ministers. / Les documents distribués à la dem ande d’un/e Représentant/e le sont sous la seule responsabilité dudit/de ladite Représentant/e, sans préjuger de la position juridique ou politique du Comité des Ministres.

Gezim Boçari Rr. Muhamet Gjollesha, Paliati 5/2, shkalla 1, ap 10 Tirana, Albania Tel 355 4 222 1576 Email: bocariuezimfevahoo.com

January 27,2010

Department for the Execution of Judgments Directorate General II Human Rights of the Council of Europe F-67075STRASBOURG CEDEX Fax 033 388 41 2793

Judgment no. 10508/02 Gjonbocari and others v. Albania

D ear Sirs,

With regard to the Judgment in Gjonbocari and Others v. Albania, (no. 10508/02, 23 October 2007). and in the line of our previous correspondence of September 4. 2008, and March 9, 2009, I would like to inform you once again on the developments of the Judgment execution:

1. Unfortunately, our efforts for the execution of the final Supreme Court Decision No. 502, date March 6, 2003, as the Strasbourg Court rules, have not succeeded. The decision of the Property Restitution Commission of Vlora District No. 109. dated 27.08.1996 is not executed yet.

2. The Judgement of Strasbourg Court in para. 101, clearly indicates that the Albanian Government should ensure the execution of the final court decisions, (see T eteriny v. Russia nr. 11913/03. para. 56. 30 July 2005; Apostol v. Georgia. Nr. 40765/02. para. 72-73 ECHR 2006).

3. As per above subject I have addressed several complaints to the Restitution Commission of Vlora. Central Agency for Property Restitution in Tirana. Bailiff Office of Vlora. Minister of Justice, PrimeMinister’s Office and Anti-Corruption Office of the Government.

4. The same complaints have been addressed in Persecutor’s Office of Vlora, where the against the Bailiff’s office of Vlora is accused for non taking any measure for executing the DH-DD(2013)444: Rule 9.1 : communication from the applicant in Gjonbocari against Albania. Documents distributed at the request of a Representative shall be under the sole responsibility of the said Representative, without prejudice to the legal or political position of the Committee of Ministers. / Les documents distribués à la dem ande d’un/e Représentant/e le sont sous la seule responsabilité dudit/de ladite Représentant/e, sans préjuger de la position juridique ou politique du Comité des Ministres.

Supreme Court Decision. We have been informed formally that the Bailiff’s Office of Vlora has penalized twice the Property Restitution Commission for ‘non-execution of the court decision’.

5. Meanwhile, the property owned by my family keeps being used by third parties, who do build illegal buildings, hoping to privatise the land at a later time by from state.

6. Formally the Ministry of Justice has reported that the Strasbourg judgement is executed. The Minister brings as an argument that the Restitution Commission of Vlora has issued three other decisions for other properties of our family. This report is untrue and covers the real facts. The property in conflict mentioned in the Strasbourg Decision is not the same with the property known by the three new decisions mentined.

7. To all our complanits is not given any answer. The Govenment and its Sub-ordinate Agencies. Govenment Agencies either are not answered, or in the best case have transmitted the information to other agencies.

8. These facts show the level of the protection of citizen’s rights in Albania. Being without any hope within here, we would like to share and disclose our problem and its concerns with You. We kindly ask any possible help from you to impose some time-limits to the Government for execution of the Strousburg Court decision.

Best regards

>' Gezim Boçari ^ \ Rr. Muhamet Gjollesha. Pallati 5/2, shkalla 1. ap 10 Tirana, Albania

Tel 355 4 222 1576 Email: [email protected]

April 2, 2010

Department for the Execution of Judgments Directorate General II Human Rights of the Council of Europe F-67075STRASBOURG CEDEX Fax 033 388 41 2793

Judgment no. 10508/02 Gjonbocari and others v. Albania

D ear Sirs,

With regard to the Judgment in Gjonbocari and Others v. Albania, (no. 10508/02, 23 October 2007), and in the line of our previous correspondence of September 4, 2008. March 9, 2009 and January 27, 2010. 1 would like to inform you with the latest claim that I have addressed to the Minister of Justice March 23, 2010.

Yet the high court decision No.502 date March 6.2003. that consists in the physical return of the land has not been executed

Please see attached letter and write me what else can I do.

Best regards

Tirana, 23.03.2010

MINISTRY OF JUSTICE - Mr. Bujar NISHANI

Dear Mr. Minister,

The Verdict of the High Court Nr. 502, date 06.03.2003, (based on the Strasbourg Verdict. Complaint Nr. 10508/02 of the 23rd of October 2007) continues to remain unexecuted. For my latest complaint of the 27.01.2010, during your position as a Minister, I still have not received any response. In that letter I had to remind You that the Government has paid the moral damage (the fine) but still has not executed the physical return of the property as determined ly the Verdict of the High Court Nr. 502, dated 06.03.2003, and with the Strasbourg decisions. Apart (his, / haue requested a meeting with You in Your qßce. For this problem since 18.05.2008 / haue directed to the Institution of the Miwstrg of Justice; State Adwocate; Baifi/fs Offce over 11 requests, for which I have not received any response and above all the court decision remains unexecuted.

Lastly I became aware that with the last reports handed over to the Delegation of the Council of Europe "ALB/HTRF Mission" 1-4 of February 2010 held in Tirana, reporting over the executions of the decisions of the Strasbourg Court (ECHR), in relation to my case, the Council of Europe has been deceived into thinking that the decision was executed. I personally could not enter into contact with the members of the delegation, being that this was avoided ly the administrators. After the departure of the delegation 1 came into contact with the information distributed to the representatives of Europe, where the “Gjonboçari vs. Albania” issue was the first reported.

I kindly request from you to offer me the possibility to confront my views with those of the persons responsible for that report, sothat you could see for uourselfthat what was renorted ,,, th* second paragraph related to the execution of the decision, is simnlu fraud it is true that the Vlora Property Committee has taken the two decisions revealed in this report. The Decision Nr. 331, dated 18.09.2008, which is reflected first in the report, is in violation of the High Court Verdict and of the decisions from Strasbourg, which should be implemented vis-à-vis. Decision 331 is different in nature from the Verdict of the High Court, as it substitutes the physical return of the property with compensation, making in this way an illegal transfer of the nationalized property of my family in favour of third persons. We have complained to the Agency about that lawbreaking decision which serves the interests of the mafia of touristic land-banking and corrupted politicians and judges which have practically seized that property in an illegal way. The other hidden truth in the report is that Decision 331, dated 18.09.2008, continues to be held hostage in the Central Agency in Tirana, thus exceeding every deadline set by law and preventing us from DH-DD(2013)444: Rule 9.1 : communication from the applicant in Gjonbocari against Albania. Documents distributed at the request of a Representative shall be under the sole responsibility of the said Representative, without prejudice to the legal or political position of the Committee of Ministers. / Les documents distribués à la dem ande d’un/e Représentant/e le sont sous la seule responsabilité dudit/de ladite Représentant/e, sans préjuger de la position juridique ou politique du Comité des Ministres.

requiring the help of the court, while on the other side while we are kept “hostages’ of the Central Agency, illegal constructions and property invasion continues. Our continued complaints to the local authorities and construction inspectorate (construction police) to act according to the law, for several years now. (all on deaf ears. This, combined with the progress of implementation of the Law for Legalization of Illegal Constructions, constitute the mechanisms with which I, the rightful owner, am deprived of and ripped off my inherited property “in the name of the law”.

If You seek the rule of law, the Strasbourg Verdict has to be implemented immediately. It is practically required the fulfilment of material inconsistence from the decision taken from itself the Vlora Committee. The decision has been taken in accordance with the law in force, Nr. 7698, has been registered with protocol by the Committee, and registered in the Offices of Registration of Immovable Properties (ZRPP), where later this registration was reversed without a court decision within the same day as requested by the illegal possessor ( third person) of one of the returned parcels. This outrageous act has not yet been analysed by the responsible authorities, even though I have brought forward the necessary documentation and supplementary complaints.

The happenings on this case are a shame for the justice system. For this property, consisting of a singular block and nationalized in 1947, we have documents testifying of our legitimacy and exclusive rights. Also, the cadastral documents of 1994 we possess verify that there is no overlapping with other property owners. From the Court I have required to be amended the material mistake of that decision (of commission of property), handed over to us with insufficient material. If the directors of the Vlora Property Committee, the Agency in Tirana, the Ministry of Justice, and all institutions where I was directed, would have implemented Article 120 of the Code of Administrative Procedures (fulfilment without time limit for cases with material deficiencies, as it results also by the decision given by the Vlora Property committee) or would be willing to implement Article 2 of Law 8053 of 1995, than the property that was expropriated from us ly the dictatorial system would have been returned to the rightful owner, and there would be no need for me to resort to adjudication in domestic courts and in Strasbourg. That Decision of the Commission provided as a remedy about 1% of our expropriated land, as was provided in the law in force in 1993. However, it was exactly this 1% that was sought ly politicians and those in power, hence causing countless troubles and forcing us to continue to knock on office doors which remain closed. If the Strasbourg Verdict is to be implemented, the unlawfully obtained property should be released by the illegal possessors.

Please see Strasbourg decision published in the Additional Official Journal 31 2008, paragraph 52 and 101 and point 2 (Gjonbocari v/Albania Nr 10508/02 , 23 October 2007). The other Verdict No. 364 dated 23.10.2008, relates to another property, namely “the Aviation Field”. DH-DD(2013)444: Rule 9.1 : communication from the applicant in Gjonbocari against Albania. Documents distributed at the request of a Representative shall be under the sole responsibility of the said Representative, without prejudice to the legal or political position of the Committee of Ministers. / Les documents distribués à la dem ande d’un/e Représentant/e le sont sous la seule responsabilité dudit/de ladite Représentant/e, sans préjuger de la position juridique ou politique du Comité des Ministres.

For all the above, I am compelled to complain also to the Department for Execution of Decisions of Strasbourg being that the "Report" was formulated in a way as to give the impression that the Strasbourg Verdict has been implemented.

Even though I have made 10 penal complaints for the problem of the “Jonufra" property, the Prosecutor’s Office, has not given any response and closed all investigations. The letter of the Ministry of Justice, protocol No. 8079/1 of 22.10.2009, addressed to the Agency, is also evidence of the level of manipulations and the high rank illegal acts committed in relation to this property. The third paragraph of this letter affirms that in April 2009 the Albanian State has reported to the Council of Europe that “the issue is being considered” and in that same paragraph it is emphasized that “the same can not be reported again”. According to the law Decisions of the High Court and those of the Strasbourg are “executive titles” which are to be executed immediately and not put under “consideration” for an indefinite period of time.

Mr. Nishani, I have requested a simple meeting with you and that you act in accordance with your powers and resolve this outrageous case wich is in violation of the obligation to enforce the Decisions of the European Court of Human Rights. Mr. Nishani, I am not asking for pity, but am in search of my right to the property I have inherited, and which is denied to me, illegally, by politicians, who have continuously sought to seize it from 1 9 9 4.

In hope of a positive answer by yourself, Respectfully yours,

Gëzim BOÇARI

R ruga “M .G jollesha”, Pall 5/2, shkalla 1, ap. 10. Tiranë Cel. 068 20 76 736 DH-DD(2013)444: Rule 9.1 : communication from the applicant in Gjonbocari against Albania. Documents distributed at the request of a Representative shall be under the sole responsibility of the said Representative, without prejudice to the legal or political position of the Committee of Ministers. / Les documents distribués à la dem ande d’un/e Représentant/e le sont sous la seule responsabilité dudit/de ladite Représentant/e, sans préjuger de la position juridique ou politique du Comité des Ministres.

Gezim Boçari Rr. M uhamct Gjollesha, Pallati 5/2, shkalia 1, ap 10 Tirana, Albania

Tel 355 4 222 1576 Em ail: boeai igcy.im'fl valioo.rnm

O ctober 18, 2010

Department for the Execution of Judgments Directorate General II Human Rights of the Council of Europe F-67075STRASBOURG CEDEX Fax 033 3 8 8 4 1 2793

Judgm ent no. 10508/02 Gjonbocari and others v. Albania

D ear S irs.

Further to your request for additional information, I would like to bring to your attention that this is the fifth letter I am writing concerning judgment in the case Gjonbocari and Others v. Albania (No 10508/02 ol 23 October 2007), in the line with our previous four letters of 4 September 2008. 9 March 2009, 27 January 2010. and 2 April 2010.

I would like to inform you that Decision No 502 of the Supreme Court of 6 March 2003, on the physical restitution of the land, has not been executed. My repeated petitions addressed to the Minister of Justice, the Prime Minister and the Property Agency have not been answered.

• In the report of 9 April 2009 submitted by the State General Advocate’s Office at the Ministry ol Justice to the meeting with the representatives from Strasburg, concerning the execution of the European Court decisions on the implementation of the general and individual measures, held on 2 February 2010. the Albanian party informed that the Supreme Court

decision has been executed. Specifically, the second paragraph of this report says: ‘Concerning execution of the court decision on the handling of property, it is found that, on 18 September 2008, the Regional Office on Property Compensation and Restitution. Vlora County,... by Decision No 331... must give back 20 270 square metres,... and compensate... 4 230 square metres ....’ If such a thing has been reported as the execution of Decision No 502 of the Supreme Court of 6 March 2003, which concerns the Strasburg decision, I object to and denounce it as fabrication of the truth. The decision of the Supreme Court has not yet been DH-DD(2013)444: Rule 9.1 : communication from the applicant in Gjonbocari against Albania. Documents distributed at the request of a Representative shall be under the sole responsibility of the said Representative, without prejudice to the legal or political position of the Committee of Ministers. / Les documents distribués à la dem ande d’un/e Représentant/e le sont sous la seule responsabilité dudit/de ladite Représentant/e, sans préjuger de la position juridique ou politique du Comité des Ministres.

executed, through reasons of subjectivity and wrong reading of the decision taken by the Supreme Court.

• After 2007, the Commission in Vlora took 3 decisions, and specifically, Decision No 331 of

18 September 2008. Decision No 364 of 23 October 2008. and Decision No 45 of 11 March 2009. and they allude that such decisions stand for the execution of Decision No 502 of the Supreme Court of 6 March 2003. In reality, these three decisions of the Commission in Vlora have nothing whatsoever to do with the execution of Decision No 502 of the Supreme Court, which has not yet been executed.

• Out of these three decisions taken by the Commission in Vlora, namely, Decision No 364 is taken on the restitution of another property. The other two decisions, namely, Decision No 331 of 18 September 2008 and Decision No 45 of 11 March 2009. have been taken on our property located at Jonufra. However, both these decisions have been put on suspension by the Agency on Property Restitution and Compensation in Tirana, that is. they are not executed. And what is more important is the fact that both these decisions arc very different from Decision No 502 of the Supreme Court of 6 March 2003.

• Under the decision taken by the Supreme Court, the Commission on Property Restitution and Compensation (at present, the Agency) is duty-bound ‘to make a decision in the form required by law, with reference to request filed by petitioner Gëzim Boçari.’ The petitioner lodged a request so as to make sure that the required form was given to Decision No 109, or the material shortcomings in that decision were redressed. Such a thing could be done by taking one single decision, and not two or three decisions, and the more so, if such decisions concern other surface areas (herein enclosed is Decision No 331 and Decision No 45 taken by the Commission in Vlora. which arc still on hold at the Agency).

Execution of Decision No 502 concerns the property, or the surface area, handled by Decision No 109 of the Commission on Property Restitution and Compensation of 27 August 1996. Under the heading ‘Ruled’ in page 2 of Decision No 109 of the Vlora Commission of 27 August 1996, it is specifically stated: "... must give back in kind a surface o f ground alienated into land at the location “Shkalla, ” Uji i Ftohtë, Vlora, first point Jonufra, where sheds (structures serving as temporary shelters fo r the youth working on public projects) have been set up... Two other objects, which were bought by the heirs to the owner and which give the following total surface area - 100 n f occupied by the offices, and 50 m2 serving as the central area for the youth brigade's activity- are situated within such surface area. ’ DH-DD(2013)444: Rule 9.1 : communication from the applicant in Gjonbocari against Albania. Documents distributed at the request of a Representative shall be under the sole responsibility of the said Representative, without prejudice to the legal or political position of the Committee of Ministers. / Les documents distribués à la dem ande d’un/e Représentant/e le sont sous la seule responsabilité dudit/de ladite Représentant/e, sans préjuger de la position juridique ou politique du Comité des Ministres.

Note No 76 of the Commission on Property Restitution and Compensation in Vlora, registered on 6 January 1999,which is correct and has no mistakes, specifies that, "... The Commission considered your file, and in conclusion, took Decision No 109 o f 27 August 1996. which has been duly registered, and has officially been declared to the owner. This ’ correct official document alone could be sufficient to provide a solution to our petition.

We would like to reiterate that, on account of the formal material shortcomings contained in Decision No 109 of the Commission on Property Restitution and Compensation in Vlora, and through failure to redress it in an administrative way, we brought the case to a court. An end was put to this process by Decision No 502 of the Supreme Court of 6 March 2003. which orders the Commission on Property Restitution and Compensation ‘to issue a decision in the form required by law, which must be in conformity with the request filed by petitioner

Gëzim Boçari...’ Count 1 of the scope of the lawsuit filed by us states: apply the required form to Decision No 109 of the Commission on Property Restitution and Compensation of 26 July 1996. With reference to this decision, which was taken and duly registered by the Commission, in its capacity as the responsible body pursuant to Law No 7698, but which only contained material shortcomings, the Bailiff's Office must use its authority to ensure that such shortcomings are redressed. Redressing of such materia! shortcomings (chairperson's signature, whether he is pro or against) will pave the way for the execution o f Decision No 502 o f the Supreme Court, and the decision taken in Strasburg.

• The said decision contains material shortcomings only, which, under the Administrative Procedure Code, must have been redressed a long time ago by the very Commission on Property Restitution and Compensation, or at present the Agency, without a court decision. Redressing of such shortcomings requires the time necessary do to some checking on our documents for the property that has been expropriated, on the Commission decision containing the shortcomings, and on the legal basis.

• Under Decision No 109 of the Commission in Vlora, only part of the property expropriated from us in 1947 is given back to us. Decision No 109 refers to the same surface area as that, which the Vlora District Court, by its definitive Decision No 2628 of 10 October 1994, in its final form, has recognised as land in the ownership of the expropriated subject. The same surface area has also been recognised by Decision No 1 o f the Comm ission on Property Restitution and Compensation, in Vlora, of 2 November 1995.Whereas Decision No 331 o f the Commission on Property Restitution and Compensation of 18 September 2008 excludes the giving back of the surface areas on which the provisional objects, illegally sold, are found. Here DH-DD(2013)444: Rule 9.1 : communication from the applicant in Gjonbocari against Albania. Documents distributed at the request of a Representative shall be under the sole responsibility of the said Representative, without prejudice to the legal or political position of the Committee of Ministers. / Les documents distribués à la dem ande d’un/e Représentant/e le sont sous la seule responsabilité dudit/de ladite Représentant/e, sans préjuger de la position juridique ou politique du Comité des Ministres.

lies the core of corruption, which explains why decisions on property restitution continue to be on hold until we are forced into giving up.

The document confirming that the decision of the Supreme Court has not been executed, includes Note No G-6I/5 of the Ministry of Justice, registered on 16 December 2009, which, in paragraph two, states [quote]: 'By its Note No 4/11, registered on 3 D m ,h e r 2009 th„ Rail iff', Office in Vlora has informed the Ministry o f Justice on all the nrovress n f the nrncvthn-o concerning execution o f the Court Decision No 502 o f the Supreme Court o f 6 March 2001 mul it is found that execution o f the decision is still under execution.’

• Silence over the 4 petitions lodged so far, and acceptance of the issue the way the state party is presenting it. is aggravating the situation. With reference to these issues, we have been

forced to file a lawsuit with the prosecuting attorney’s office, because we have been threatened by the use of weapons.

• Who must be blamed for the fact that, through omission to act in a timely fashion, and as specified by law on the Bailiffs Office (Articles 5 17. 560 and 602 of the Civil Procedure Code),

we continue to sustain damage? Pursuant to Law No 9235 on property restitution, as amended, we may not take a case to a court until the administrative challenge has first been completed (decision to be taken by the Agency), and such a bottleneck benefits the offender. With each passing week, our property located at Jonufra continues to be occupied by illegal buildings, on

which no state body is acting, even though, under law, it is prohibited to legalise illegal buildings in that area.

After having considered this petition for the fifth time, please do look into the possibility of sending over a team to check on the issue, making sure that this team meets with state officials in our presence, in our capacity as the affected party and the plaintiff in the judicial processes, and takes the issue of failure to execute the decision taken in Strasburg to higher levels in the Council of Ministers.

Attached: Note No G-61/5 of the Ministry of Justice, registered on 16 December 2009

Best regards

Gëzim Boçari ■p r DH-DD(2013)444: Rule 9.1 : communication from the applicant in Gjonbocari against Albania. Documents distributed at the request of a Representative shall be under the sole responsibility of the said Representative, without prejudice to the legal or political position of the Committee of Ministers. / Les documents distribués à la dem ande d’un/e Représentant/e le sont sous la seule responsabilité dudit/de ladite Représentant/e, sans préjuger de la position juridique ou politique du Comité des Ministres.

Recommended mail 16 March 2011 Gezim Boçari Rr. M uhamet Gjollesha, Pallati 5/2, shkalla 1, ap 10 Tirana, Albania

Tel 355 4 222 1576 Mobil: 067 20 72048 Email: bocaj~ige2 [email protected]

March, 16. 2011

To: The Prime Minister of Republic of Albania Mr. Sali Berisha Department for the Execution of the Decisions at the Council of Europel / F-67075STRASBOURG CEDEX Fax 033 388 41 2793

CC: The State Bar, General Attorney-at-law, Mrs. Ledina M andia

Subject: Repeated information on

1. The non-execution by the institutions of the Republic of Albania of the Decision of the European Court of Human Rights No. 10508/02 Gjonbocari and others v. Albania dated 23 October 2007. 2. The false reporting on the above execution by the responsible Albanian State Institutions at the Council of Europe. 3. The negative and privative reflection of the institution of the Prime Minister, the State Attorney and the Property Restitution Agency for not executing the Strasbourg decision (more than 10 complaints). 4. The failure to take any concrete action in connection with more than ten complaints I have addressed to the Local Authorities, The Prefect, the Mayor of Vlore and the Construction Police for enforcing the law in vigour and stopping the cutting of olive trees, the opening of construction sites and the unauthorized constructions by third persons. In addition, the 11 criminal complaints I have submitted to the Prosecutor’s Office of Vlore for the criminal acts of office abuse, theft in cooperation of my property, which the prosecution body has arbitrary ceased. 5. The demand for concrete action and specific deadline for the resolution of my property and legal rights, clearly defined in the Decision of the Property Restitution Commission of Vlore in 1996, sanctioned by the Supreme Court's decision No. 502 dated 06.03.2003 and the Strasbourg’s decision of October 23, 2007. DH-DD(2013)444: Rule 9.1 : communication from the applicant in Gjonbocari against Albania. Documents distributed at the request of a Representative shall be under the sole responsibility of the said Representative, without prejudice to the legal or political position of the Committee of Ministers. / Les documents distribués à la dem ande d’un/e Représentant/e le sont sous la seule responsabilité dudit/de ladite Représentant/e, sans préjuger de la position juridique ou politique du Comité des Ministres.

Dear Mr. Prime Minister, Dear Madam / Sir,

I, Gëzim Boçari, am hereby putting forward the following:

My property rights for the present case are certified by the document of the purchasing of the property in the year 1929 and the nationalization document of the same property in 1947. From this property, by decision of the Property Restitution and Compensation Commission of Vlora No. 109 dated 27.08.1996, restitution has only been partial due to the restrictions of Law No. 7698 of the year 1993 "On property restitution

This decision we were given by the Commission contained material deficiencies. Although the Code of Administrative Procedure provides correction of material errors, since we could not overcome the deficiencies in the administrative way, we addressed the judicial route, which ended with the decision of the Supreme Court No. 502 of March 06, 2003.

The property rights established legally through decision no. 502 dated 06.03.2003 of the Supreme Court in Tirana and finally sanctioned by the decision no. 1058/02 Gjonbocari and Others v. Albania, dated October 23, 2007, have not yet been implemented in terms of the physical return of the property according to the object of the trial and the final decision of the Supreme Court.

Regarding the decision of Strasbourg, the Government has issued the decision and the fine of Euro 49,000 has been paid in time. But the payment of the fine is a moral condemnation from the Court of Strasbourg due to the unjustified delay in the execution of the final decision of the Supreme Court No. 502 dated 06.03.2003 and it is the least important part of this conflict. This conflict is linked with the physical return of the property as defined by the object of the judgem ent according to the object of the decision of the Supreme Court No. 502, which continues to remain unexecuted due to the corruptive affairs and pressure of the tourist sites mafia. For the non-execution of the decision of Strasbourg, I have addressed my complaints to all executive institutions in Albania and five times to the EC.

Due to the delay of the execution of the physical return of the property I have gained by decision of the Supreme Court no. 502 dated 06.03.2003, in my repeated letter mailed on 18.05.2008, I have addressed the State Attorney, Mrs. Ledina Mandia by registered mail, where I have also presented a claim against Attomey-at-law Gentian Hajdini, representative of the local office of the State Attorney Vlorë. The latter, instead of the execution of the decision of the Supreme Court, of the protection of the national interests and the law, has abused his duty in order to protect the interests of third parties. I have not received any response to this claim yet. DH-DD(2013)444: Rule 9.1 : communication from the applicant in Gjonbocari against Albania. Documents distributed at the request of a Representative shall be under the sole responsibility of the said Representative, without prejudice to the legal or political position of the Committee of Ministers. / Les documents distribués à la dem ande d’un/e Représentant/e le sont sous la seule responsabilité dudit/de ladite Représentant/e, sans préjuger de la position juridique ou politique du Comité des Ministres.

In another letter dated 24.07.2010 I have again addressed the State Attorney, Mrs. Ledina Mandia, I have written the following: "Since you represent the interests of the State and are an interested party, please give me an institutional response whether you consider as executed or as not yet executed the Supreme Court's decision No. 502 dated 6.03.2003 in relation with the decision of the Strasbourg Court, application 10508/02 Gjonbocari etc. against Albania, dated 23 October 2007, a d e c isio n published in the Official Gazette No. 31, extra, 2008, and on the website of this Court (http://www.echr.coe.int). Item No. 101 of this decision reads: "Therefore, it estimates that the Albanian party should ensure, through appropriate means and promptly, the execution of the final decision of the domestic court (see among other authorities Teteriny v. Russia no. 11913/03, paragraph 56, June 30, 2005; Apostol u. Georgia, Nr. 40765/02, paragraph 72-73 ECHR 2006). The Strasbourg decision in the section "Assessment of the Court" item 52, says: "The Court notes that the decision of the Supreme Court, dated March 6, 2003, assigned the Commission of Vlora the task to issue a vis-a-vis decision for the applicants...... ". The execution of this decision relates to the fulfilment of material deficiencies in the Decision No. 109, dated 27.8.1996, of the PRCC of Vlore, a decision that is taken by the Commission and signed by the majority of the members, bearing a protocol number, but later kept blocked for interest motives of persons who have been and still are interested in profiting and using this lot of ground coveted for its touristic values". As for my request dated 24.7.2010, the State Attorneyhas sent me answer no. 1462/1, dated August 05, 2010, in which he replies that the decision of the Supreme Court and that of Strasbourg have been implemented.

On August 08, 2010, I asked the State Attorney to review this response, as the decision of the Supreme Court and the decision of Strasbourg, which are executive titles, have not been implemented, arguing that "a court order on the property, as the present case is, may only be considered as executed when the applicant has the opportunity to record the decision in the Registry of Immovable Property without any hindrance”.

Contrary to the reality,the state administration reports to the Council of Europe that this decision has been executed. For this, the State Attorney finds justification in the payment of the fine and also in two other decisions that are taken by the Commission of Vlora. Those decisions are not related to the property and the object of the application of the decision of the Supreme Court No. 502, dated 06.03.2003, and the decision of Strasbourg.

An analysis of what surfaces are physically returned by these two decisions will reveals that is intend to justify the theft of the property having been returned by the decision of the Supreme Court. Beside this the two decisions cited by the State Attorney on page 2 of the response dated 05.08.2010, Decision No. 331 dated 19.9.2008 and Decision no. 45 dated 11.3.2009 have been made by the Property Return & Compensation (PRC) Commission of Vlore, but they are being held pending at the PRC Agency beyond the deadline of 45 days determined by the law, meaning DH-DD(2013)444: Rule 9.1 : communication from the applicant in Gjonbocari against Albania. Documents distributed at the request of a Representative shall be under the sole responsibility of the said Representative, without prejudice to the legal or political position of the Committee of Ministers. / Les documents distribués à la dem ande d’un/e Représentant/e le sont sous la seule responsabilité dudit/de ladite Représentant/e, sans préjuger de la position juridique ou politique du Comité des Ministres.

they have not been executed as well. Without the completion of the administrative procedure, with the making of the decision by the Agency, by law I cannot address the court for their correction, nor can I register them at the 1PRO. However, even if they get executed from today, these two decisions not only replace the Supreme Court and Strasbourg decision, but in fact protect another huge corruptive affair on the property that will be returned to me if Supreme Court and Strasbourg decision is applied. This has to do with the illegal sale of the temporary facilities set up for a youth action centre in the year 1970 and other non-existing objects at the time of sale, actions which have been devised for privatizing the land under the object and the functional ground lot.

Practically, the State Attorney has not acted to protect the enforcement of law and the interests of the state, but is doing quite the opposite. The functioning of the rule of law and the fulfilment of obligations arising under Article 46 of the Convention for the State require the vis-a-vis implementation of the decision of the Supreme Court No. 502 dated 06.03.2003 for the physical return of the surface returned by the Property Commission of Vlore by decision No. 109, dated 27.8.1996, pursuant to the property law of the year 1993. What differs from the 8-year period of the decision of the Supreme Court and the 4-year period that has passed since the penalty imposed of the Strasbourg decision is the fact that the current decision cannot be made on by the Vlora Commission. This commission has been sued and has been assigned by the Supreme Court decision to issue a decision, but such commissions have now been dissolved and the law has transferred their duties to the relevant Agency. Therefore the Agency m ust return one by one (vis-a-vis) the property that has been returned by the decision of the year 1996. This has been defined by the object of the trial and the final decision of the Supreme Court No. 502. The object of the trial was the giving of the requested shape to the decision of the PRC Commission of Vlore No. 109 dated 27.8.1996 and the Supreme Court has decided: “the obligation of the PRC Commission of Vlore to issue the decision in the form required by the law in relation with the request of the applicant Gëzim Boçari".

This decision No. 502 of the Supreme Court, about which I am complaining for not having been executed, clearly requires the giving of the appropriate legal form to the decision of the Commission of Vlora No. 109 dated 27.8.1996. For this execution, request should be made so that the PRC Agency issues one sole decision and not two or three decisions of different content treating other surfaces of the property, which under the current law, must also be returned back to my family. This execution requires seriousness in the enforcement of the law and a commitment of a maximum of one or two hours by the PRC Agency would be enough for the verification of our dossier, in which among many other documents we have also filed:

1) Documents verifying that this property was purchased in the year 1929 and my family were confiscated of it in the year 1947. (I add that according to legislation in force, this property which lies in the tourist area and is located within the yellow line of the city should be returned to the expropriated owner), DH-DD(2013)444: Rule 9.1 : communication from the applicant in Gjonbocari against Albania. Documents distributed at the request of a Representative shall be under the sole responsibility of the said Representative, without prejudice to the legal or political position of the Committee of Ministers. / Les documents distribués à la dem ande d’un/e Représentant/e le sont sous la seule responsabilité dudit/de ladite Représentant/e, sans préjuger de la position juridique ou politique du Comité des Ministres.

2) Cadastre Certification, module 5, dt. 10.5.1996, showing the lots owned by the father and those owned by the mother, which are owners with separate documents at the same block in Jonufër and the Cadastre specifies that there is no overlap with other owners. 3) The Record (manuscript) of the Vlora Commission decision No. 109 dated 27.08.1996, and the same decision, typewritten, both signed in conformity with the legal rules by the majority of the members of the commission. 4) The written document Prot. No. 76/06.01.1999 of the PRC Commission of V lore, writing exactly: "... The Commission has reviewed your file and in the end has made the decision Nr. 109 dated.27.8.1996, which has been assigned a protocol number, being also officially announced to the owner.". This filed document signed by the chairm an of the PRC Commission, indicating that the decision 109 is an activity of the PRC Commission in application of the law No. 7698 for the return of property... even alone is a sufficient document making up for the material deficiencies in a decision taken and filed in conformity with the law. This supplement is clearly stipulated by the Administrative Procedure Code (Article 115 and following for relatively worthless acts), and this would have resolved our complaint, without the need to address the Court, later Strasbourg and the Prosecutor’s Office. 5) The written document Prot. No. 471/1, dated 08.10.2007, of the Military Geographic Institute, which specifies that Kepi i Kalasë (the Castle Cape) is a trigonometric point and is situated at a distance of 136 linear meters from the border of plot Nr. 5. This official document of a specialized and sole state institution is enough to determine the northern border of our property with an error of up to 2 linear meters. This document identifies a giant theft of over 40 ha, which has been organized in Jonufër by the previous chairmen of Vlora PRC Commission and the Agency (Gene Panozaqi and Besnik Maho). 6) The written document Prot. No. 939, dated 10.06.1994, with the Subject: "cancellation of document" of the Urban Planning Section of Vlore. I have asked several times for the analysis of this official document (a request for which the agency has been silent); this will reveal the starting point of this rather huge theft signed by the previous chairm en of the Property Commission of Vlore and of Tirana Agency. 7) The written document Prot. No. 3358, dated 30.7.2008, by which the General Secretary of the Prime Ministry has asked the Agency to enforce the law and has asked them to reply within 10 days for the legal offenses the Commission against Corruption had found in Jonufër. 2.5 years have passed and the Agency has not been acting for the implementation of the law. !!

All the docum ents we have subm itted in our file are in conformity with the law, while on the other hand is the corruption identified through the documents by which our property, divided in parts, has been registered in favour of other persons. These are documents with no legal value, as the very Anticorruption Commission of the Prime Ministry in the year 2008 found them to be documents issued outside authority and in violation of the law; however those who have received them continue to be called owners and benefit by using this property. DH-DD(2013)444: Rule 9.1 : communication from the applicant in Gjonbocari against Albania. Documents distributed at the request of a Representative shall be under the sole responsibility of the said Representative, without prejudice to the legal or political position of the Committee of Ministers. / Les documents distribués à la dem ande d’un/e Représentant/e le sont sous la seule responsabilité dudit/de ladite Représentant/e, sans préjuger de la position juridique ou politique du Comité des Ministres.

The obstructive attitude of the state administration favours law offenders quite op en ly.This postponement of deadlines has created conditions for illega l constructions by third parties to continue on this ground and the Local Government and the Construction Police do not take any action.Despite the numerous complaints I have sent to the Construction Police, the Prefect and the Mayor of Vlora, these institutions have avoided the obligation of the enforcement of law and have taken no action to request the Construction Police to enforce the law and pull down the illegal constructions. As long as this property is not returned to me and my complaints are not taken into consideration by the Construction Police and illegal constructions are occupying my property every week, I urge the State, in pursuance of the legal obligations, to order the Construction Policeto demolish the illegal constructions as defined by the law on tourist areas and as it has acted in other tourist areas.

The reason why such corrupt individuals, who have infiltrated the executive power, continue to recycle me for several years from one office to another and leave me on hold is to create time gaps for favouring third parties linked with benefiting interests, with the local and central government, so that they can continue to benefit from the use of this property of tourist values. This is the essence of the non-execution of the Strasbourg’s decision, which the State has reported as an executed decision.

For the non-execution of this decision of the Supreme Court I have addressed also the Minister of Justice with several complaints - on 27.01.2010, on 23.03.2010 and recently on 11.07.2010 (not mentioning previous requests), as well as the Property Restitution and Compensation Agency in Tirana and the Vlora Commission with more than 20 requests and I have received no response from them whatsoever, positive or n e g a tiv e .

Even the prosecutor’s office has kneeled down in front of the mafia of tourist properties. Regarding our property of Jonufër, I have sent 11 Criminal Complaints to the Prosecutor’s Office, accompanied by appropriate documents and argum ents about the abuse of office and the theft of my property performed in collaboration by state administration officials. Among these complaints, I have also accused the Bailiff’s Office of for the non-execution of the Decision of the Supreme Court and of Strasbourg’s Decision. The Prosecutor’s Office of Vlore has decided the closure of the investigative file for all these cases, and to me this has resulted in psychological stress, waste of time and monetary costs.

I am sure that Mrs. Mandia Ledina, currently the State Attorney, is outside of these corruptive affairs developed from the year 1996 to date by the authorities with the property of Jonufër and I would like to believe in her professional conscience, but as the State Attorney, she reads my requests incorrectly, reads incorrectly the Court decision and the laws and like this continues to create more artificial delays to me. When the institution of the State Attorney and the state administration do not DH-DD(2013)444: Rule 9.1 : communication from the applicant in Gjonbocari against Albania. Documents distributed at the request of a Representative shall be under the sole responsibility of the said Representative, without prejudice to the legal or political position of the Committee of Ministers. / Les documents distribués à la dem ande d’un/e Représentant/e le sont sous la seule responsabilité dudit/de ladite Représentant/e, sans préjuger de la position juridique ou politique du Comité des Ministres.

implement the court decisions, judicial guarantees are violated, constitutional obligations are violated and the state does not operate according to the laws.

In these 20 years of democracy we have believed in the construction of a democratic state, where hum an fundamental freedoms and the right to enjoy the property would get the maximum support of the very state authorities, but in this case, they are not only failing to act, but for years now, in the name of the law, the "upcoming villains" further enhance their stealth to the detriment of ordinary citizens. Thus, apart from my impossibility to invest in my property, this level of the executive power de facto adds multiple damages to my family, since during this time in Jonufër the cutting of olive trees continues, just as the opening of construction sites and the unauthorized constructions by persons who have political support while I am being recycled through offices and courts.

The truth of this complaint can be well verified through only one answer you may ask the Immovable Property Registration Office of Vlora to give about the legal status of property of Jonufër in the part form the Castle Bar to the river of Vrrizi, which was nationalized in 1947. I have asked for this answer many times, but I have never received one, as this would unm ask the thieves of my property in this tourist area. If you ask, it will result even that the property determined in the decision of the Supreme Court No. 502 does not appear registered in my name and in the name of my family, but in the nam es of other families.

As the Prime M inister the highest authority of the executive power having the right to ask the fulfillment of obligations resulting from the European Conventions, I kindly ask you once again to use your authority, so that the law and our legitimate right can be applied.

I ask from you, Mr. Prime Minister, representative of the executive power, for seeking specifically the enforcement of the law and for clarifying this violation of the laws and the fog m asking this great corruptive affair, I ask your intervention:

1. To order The Urban Inspectorate of Construction (the Construction Police) to enforce the law and pull down the illegal constructions in the tourist area of Jonufër. 2. I ask you to notify me of a timeline for the resolution of my property and legal rights, clearly defined in the Decision of the Property Commission of Vlore in 1996, sanctioned by the Supreme Court's decision No. 502 dated 6.3.2003 and the Strasbourg’s decision of October 23, 2007. This can be easily and immediately accomplished by ordering the PRC Agency of Tirana to verify the file of my documents and in application of the decision of the Supreme Court No. 502 dated 06.03.2003 and the decision of Strasbourg to fulfill the material deficiencies in the Vlora Commission's decision No. 109 dated 27.8.1996 by applying and as provided by the property restitution law (no. 9235 dated 29.07.2004, as amended) in force, i.e. to ask the PRC Agency Tirana to issue a decision in the form required by law, in connection with the DH-DD(2013)444: Rule 9.1 : communication from the applicant in Gjonbocari against Albania. Documents distributed at the request of a Representative shall be under the sole responsibility of the said Representative, without prejudice to the legal or political position of the Committee of Ministers. / Les documents distribués à la dem ande d’un/e Représentant/e le sont sous la seule responsabilité dudit/de ladite Représentant/e, sans préjuger de la position juridique ou politique du Comité des Ministres.

request of the applicant Gëzim Boçari, according to the object of the trial and Supreme Court’s decision No. 502, dated 06.03.2003, and the decision of Strasbourg, which continues to be unexecuted. By the new decision, the Agency m ust also realize the return of that portion of the property, which the Commission has recognized in the year 1996, but which at that time was not returned to the expropriated owners due to the limitations defined by the property law of the year 1993. Today the property agency that keeps hostage of our property for 14 years m ust return our property back to us in accordance with the current property law and other laws in presently in vigor. 3 . Since the state has continued to keep possession of this property of ours nationalized in the year 1947, it is its obligation to return it to us, and I ask you to put this request on the way of implementation, so that legal responsibility can be imposed on those officials, who during this period have done business with my property and have not also implemented the decision of Strasbourg, those who for benefiting have made legalizations in flagrant contradiction with the law. 4 . To apply the requirements of the Anticorruption Commission of the Prime Ministry (point 7, page 5). 5. To ask the Prosecutor’s Office to merge and reopen the investigation for the 11 processes it has capriciously closed, thus becoming a supportive instrum ent of this robbery of tourist sites, organized by the power authorities of both wings.

I ask from the Department for the Execution of the Decisions at the Council of Europe:

1. To require Albania to report when my property and legal rights will be resolved, rights which have been sanctioned by the Supreme Court's decision No. 502 dated 06.03.2003 and the Strasbourg’s decision of October 23, 2007 and to present short time terms within which the above mentioned problems will be resolved and which practically consist in filling the material deficiencies in the Decision of the Property Commission of Vlore in 1996, held hostage for corruptive purposes. 2. Whether tour Department has the opportunity to seek clarification from the Albanian State as to which citizens currently appear as registered owners of the property cited above, which through the documents filed with the Property Agency is proved to have been the property of my family nationalized by the state. What documents and pursuant to which law have they become owners and presently getting rich by using my property. Can I also have an answer to these questions? 3 . To explain to me: whether I have the right to address again to the Court of Strasbourg again for the non-execution of the decision of that Court ? 4 . Can you act speedily to send a specialist or a team for the verification of this flagrant case? This team can verify this mega corruption on these tourist sites even within the day, as the problem in this is simple. My nationalized property is a single block with clearly defined borders. Despite the numerous defects they contain, DH-DD(2013)444: Rule 9.1 : communication from the applicant in Gjonbocari against Albania. Documents distributed at the request of a Representative shall be under the sole responsibility of the said Representative, without prejudice to the legal or political position of the Committee of Ministers. / Les documents distribués à la dem ande d’un/e Représentant/e le sont sous la seule responsabilité dudit/de ladite Représentant/e, sans préjuger de la position juridique ou politique du Comité des Ministres.

property laws in the current case express it clearly that when the property lies in the tourist areas and within the city boundary line, it m ust returned to the expropriated s u b je c t. We are now on the eve of local elections to be held on May 8, 2011. The experience of these 15 years has shown that on the eve of elections illegal constructions become greater in num ber, and so do abusive legalizations contrary to the law. If this case, as you have informed me, will be examined in the next EC meeting in June 2011, when it is reasoned that the decision of the Supreme Court and that of Strasbourg are executive titles and as such should be executed, then it will be too late. When the time for the execution of this decision in practice comes, there will be nothing left for restitution from the properties of my family, because as in "The Old Man and the Sea" that property is grabbed every passing week by third parties, who build illegally and are protected from predacious rulers.

Awaiting your reply,

S in c e re ly ,

Gëzim BOÇARI DH-DD(2013)444: Rule 9.1 : communication from the applicant in Gjonbocari against Albania. Documents distributed at the request of a Representative shall be under the sole responsibility of the said Representative, without prejudice to the legal or political position of the Committee of Ministers. / Les documents distribués à la dem ande d’un/e Représentant/e le sont sous la seule responsabilité dudit/de ladite Représentant/e, sans préjuger de la position juridique ou politique du Comité des Ministres.

Gezim Boçari Rr. M uhamet Gjollesha Pallati 5/2, Shkalla 1, Apt 10 Tirana, Albania Tel: + 355 42 22 1576 Cell: + 67 20 72048 E-mail: bocarigezimffrvahoo.com

July 15, 2011

Department For The Execution Of The Judgements Of The European Court Of Human R igh ts Council of Europe F-67075 Strasbourg-Cedex

Dear Sir/Madame:

This is to advise that to date, I have sent you seven complaint letters, including this one, about the following issues:

1. Failure by the Albanian government to execute the European Court of Human Rights Decision No. 10508/02 Gjonbocari and others v. Albania dated 23 October 2007; 2 . Untrue reporting by the relevant Albanian institutions to the Council of Europe regarding the execution of the above decision; and 3 . Negative attitude and denial by the Albanian Prime Minister’s office, the Ombudsman and the Property Restitution Agency of the non-execution of the above European Court of Human Rights decision (more than 10 complaints).

In addition, I have kindly asked you by my letters to view, within your bounds of possibility, the possibility of dispaching a specialist or a team to Albania to verify this obvious case of cheating by the Albanian government, which has reported that the above decision of the European Court of Human Rights has been executed when, in fact, it is not. Currently, my family property, which has been on trial, has not yet been registered under my family name, but under the name of third parties that keep on using it illegally. You can easily check it up, and thus verify which party is cheating.

This is the seventh letter I am sending you because unfortunately, to date, I have had no reply to any of my previous six letters. Your failure to reply to my complaint letters greatly affects me because it backs up the breach of law, the failure by the Albanian government to restore the property to my family, and provides the tourist land mafia and Albanian corrupt government officials and politicians with the opportunity to rob my family of our inherited property. Such situation would lead us to self-judgement, and we have been doing our best to av o id it.

1 would highly appreciate your taking your time to read my March 16, 2011 letter to your Department, and please reply to my five requests listed at the end of the above letter.

Looking forward to hearing from you at your earliest convenience,

S in c e re ly , Assoc. Prof. Gezim Boçari DH-DD(2013)444: Rule 9.1 : communication from the applicant in Gjonbocari against Albania. Documents distributed at the request of a Representative shall be under the sole responsibility of the said Representative, without prejudice to the legal or political position of the Committee of Ministers. / Les documents distribués à la dem ande d’un/e Représentant/e le sont sous la seule responsabilité dudit/de ladite Représentant/e, sans préjuger de la position juridique ou politique du Comité des Ministres.

AVOKATI P O r u L u r

REPUBLIKA E SHQIPERISE 1 AVOKAT1 1 POPULLIT Seksioni i Administrates Adresa. Bulv; "Zhan D'Ark” Nr. 2 Tel 4- 355 4 2380 300 1001, Tirana-ALBANIA 4- 3 5 5 4 2 3 8 0 3 3 3 Faks + 355 4 2379 826 E-mail: ap@ avokaiipopullit.gov al W eb-site: www.avokatipopullit.gov.al

Nr. /c 3 / G l é >/ Prot. Tirane ç j j o J J l D 12 Nr. Dok. 201001390/37

L enda: Përsëritet kërkesa për ndërhyrje institucionale për ekzekutimin e rekomandirnit tonë daté 14.11.2011 drejtuar Agjencisë së Kthimit dhe Kompensimil të Pronave, Tiranë, lidhur me ekzekutimin e Vendimit nr. 10508/02, 23.10.2007 të Gjykatës Evropiane të të Drejtave të Njeriut, në favor të familjes Boçari

Drejtuar: Ministrit te Drejtësisë Z. Edurad HALIMI

TIRANE

I nderuar Z. Minister, Me shkresën nr. K3/G26-32 Prot, date 20.03.2012, ju kemi përcjellë kërkesën për ndërhyrje institucionale për ekzekutimin e rekomandirnit tonë nr. K3/G26-27 Prot datë 14.11.2011, drejtuar Agjencisë së Kthimit dhe Kompensimil të Pronave, Tiranë, lidhur me ekzekutimin e Vendimit nr. 10508/02, 23.10.2007 të Gjykatës Evropiane të të Drejtave të Njeriut, në favor të familjes Boçari. Rekomandimi është bazuar në nenin 142/3 të Kushtetutës, ku sanksionohet, që : “Organet e shtetit janë të detyrura të ekzekutojnë vendimet gjyqësore ”, si dhe në nenin 21/b të Ligjit nr.8454, datë 04.02.1999 “Për Avokatin e Popullit”, i ndryshuar, ku parashikohet, se: “Avokati i Popullit paraqet rekomandime për marrje masash për vënien në vend të së drejtës së shkelur tek organi administrativ që ko shkaktuar shkeljen ”. Duke qënë, se nga ana Juaj, nuk është kthyer përgjigje lidhur me argumentai e sjella në vëmëndje nga ana e Institucionit të Avokatit të Popullit, si dhe meqënëse është tejkaluar afati prej 30 ditësh, parashikuar në nenin 22 të Ligjit Nr.8454 dt.04.02.1999 “Për Avokatin e Popullit”, i ndryshuar, kemi detyrimin ligjor t u rikujtojmë për dërgimin e një përgjigje zyrtare për sa më sipër, brënda të cilës duhet të n'a kishit përcjellë qëndrimin tuaj, rreth rekomandirnit tonë. Duke besuar në mirëkuptimin dhe bashkëpunimin tuaj, bashkëlidhur po j-'u përcjellimim një kopje të rekomandirnit nr. K3/G26-27 Prot, datë 14.11.2011, drejtuar Drejtorit të Përgjithshëm të Agjencisë së Kthimit dhe Kompensimil të DH-DD(2013)444: Rule 9.1 : communication from the applicant in Gjonbocari against Albania. Documents distributed at the request of a Representative shall be under the sole responsibility of the said Representative, without prejudice to the legal or political position of the Committee of Ministers. / Les documents distribués à la dem ande d’un/e Représentant/e le sont sous la seule responsabilité dudit/de ladite Représentant/e, sans préjuger de la position juridique ou politique du Comité des Ministres.

Pronave, z. Elvis Çefa, për ekzekutimin e Vendimit nr. 10508/02, 23.10.2007 të Gjykatës Evropiane të të Drejtave të Njeriut në Strasburg, në favor të familjes Boçari, për të cil in presim përgjigje brënda 10 ditëve.

Me respekt,

AVOKATH POPULLIT

ZANI 1 # " DH-DD(2013)444: Rule 9.1 : communication from the applicant in Gjonbocari against Albania. Documents distributed at the request of a Representative shall be under the sole responsibility of the said Representative, without prejudice to the legal or political position of the Committee of Ministers. / Les documents distribués à la dem ande d’un/e Représentant/e le sont sous la seule responsabilité dudit/de ladite Représentant/e, sans préjuger de la position juridique ou politique du Comité des Ministres.

I s p A r.; ! A % KÏÎ-ptVlT DHL*. .. .. 8 knMPENSCai' TE f-HDNAVE REPUBLIKA E SHQIPERISE ) " MINI,STRIA E DREJTËSISË j. MR. ___P R O !. Drejtoria e Përgjithshme e Çështjeve tëDrejtësisè | 9 ;2 - Æ | Drejtoria e Inspektimit Administrativ L ------— ------“

Tirane, nië^ ,/ û 2009

Lënda: Mbi shkresën Nr. 2645 prot. date I 3.10.2009, të Avokalurës së Përgjithshme të Slitetit.

AGJENCISË SË KTHIMIT DUE KOMPENSIMIT TË PRONAVE

TIRANË

Me shkresën Nr. 2645 prot, date 13.10.2009, të Avokalurës sc Pcrgjiihslime të S h let it. jeini vënë në dijeni se. nga ana e Avokalit të Pcrgjiihshëm të Slitetit. ëslitë kërkuar information nga Zyra Rajonalc c Agjcncisc së Kthimit dhe Kompensimil të Pronave Vlorë, lidhur me ekzekutimin e vendimit le Gjykaiës E vropiane pci ië Dre j tat c Njeriut. pëi çëshijcn “Gjonboçari kundër Shqipërisë".

Nëpërmjet kesaj shkrese. Avokati i Përgjilhshëm i Slitetit, ka parashtruar gjithashtu se është e domosdoshme që Zyra Rajonalc c Agjencisë së Kthimit dhe Kompensimil të Pronave Vlorë. të veprojë me urgjencë për zbatimin e kelij vendimi, pasi për çdo vcndimarrje që ka të bëjë me zbatimin e vendimit të Gjykatës Evropiane për të Dre j tat e Njeriut, shleti Shqiptar është i detvruar të raportojë pranë Komitctil të Këshillii ië Ministrave, të Këshillit të Kvropës.

Po kështu, Avokati i Pcrgjithsliëm i Shtctit ka theksuar se për këlë çështje, shleti shqiptar ka raportuar sc fundmi në Prill 2009, se çështja është në sliqyrtim, duke bërë te qartc se nuk është më e mundur të raportohet sërish c njëjta gjë, pasi në të kundert shteti Shqiptar rrczikon të penalizohet, duke u kritikuar ashpër nga Komitcti i Këshillit të Ministrave si dhe rrczikon moszbatimin c parimeve të përcaktuara në Marrëvcshjen c Stabilizim Asociimit.

Përsa m ë si për, kcrkojmë nga ana juaj, të informohet Ministria c Drejtcsisë dhe Avokati ira e Përgjithshme c Slitetit, brenda dates 30.10.2009.

Duke j u falenderuar për bashkëpiinimin,

SEKRETÄR: I PERGJIJHSREM

FLORJÆWURI vo

iîutevascli "Zog !"• rc. Iclel'on. 1-355 -1 2593SS/7I ISO T ira iié Faks + 355 4 2345611 c - m a il ,1'iu.slivc go-. :il DH-DD(2013)444: Rule 9.1 : communication from the applicant in Gjonbocari against Albania. Documents distributed at the request of a Representative shall be under the sole responsibility of the said Representative, without prejudice to the legal or political position of the Committee of Ministers. / Les documents distribués à la dem ande d’un/e Représentant/e le sont sous la seule responsabilité dudit/de ladite Représentant/e, sans préjuger de la position juridique ou politique du Comité des Ministres.

'0 0 REPUBLIKA e SHQIPËRISË MINISTRIA E DREJTÊSISË

N r- Î 7 v / j g Prot (lutcmi referojuni né rast pêrgjigje) l'iranë, m ë /20I2 l.cnda: Kthim përuiit’io

Dreitiiiir: AGJENCISË SË KTHIMIT DUE KOMPESIMIT TË PRONAVE

Gëzim Boçah

Rr. "Sulcjman Dclvina". Nd. 9. Ap. 10, Kodi Poaar 1019

TIRANË EEüSPss mssMSMsm

Duke ju falënderuar për bashkëpunimin.

SEKRETARII PËRGJITHSHËM GF.RD.IAN XHANARI

Bulevardt "Zog I - ré". Tirane http://wwwjustice.gov.al Telefon +355 4 2259388 Faks + 3 5 5 4 23 3 591